UK - Airlines in discussions to shake up part ownership of NATS
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: looking out of the window
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
UK - Airlines in discussions to shake up part ownership of NATS
Noticed it as a breaking news strip on Sky. No idea exactly what they might be discussing, but the sky news page is here:
Airlines Discuss Shake-Up In Ownership Of National Air Traffic Control Service | Business | Sky News
Maybe a story to watch in the next few hours/days. Unless anyone on here can shed any light?
Airlines Discuss Shake-Up In Ownership Of National Air Traffic Control Service | Business | Sky News
Maybe a story to watch in the next few hours/days. Unless anyone on here can shed any light?
Spink Pots
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Up in the air
Posts: 255
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Barron was employed to prepare the company for this scenario. Some people seen it coming years ago, most did not. As much as you might hate the man, he has done a damn fine job of working to his brief.
I wonder how all the "YES" voters feel about this.
I wonder how all the "YES" voters feel about this.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Scotland, ATCO
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is the time when we need to stick together....The last thing we want is a new owner to come and strip NATS of whats left of our terms and conditions...
More inportantly we need to have the union investigating how we can fund an employee buyout, it may be a wild idea but something we would be stupid not to look into.
More inportantly we need to have the union investigating how we can fund an employee buyout, it may be a wild idea but something we would be stupid not to look into.
PPRuNe Bashaholic
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 1997
Location: The Peoples Alcoholic Republic of Jockistan
Posts: 1,442
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is the time when we need to stick together....
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: france
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 121decimal375
...More importantly we need to have the union investigating how we can fund an employee buyout, it may be a wild idea but something we would be stupid not to look into.
Last edited by saintex2002; 16th Oct 2009 at 18:38.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Cellblock K
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Excuse the figures recalled from memory ...
I have a problem understanding how all this will end up ......
1 - Government 'sells' 49% to the Airline Group, who put in ~£60m of their own money and then borrow ~£650m, saddling that debt onto NATS. (2005, shares were valued around £1.20 I recall?)
2 - If the Airline Group then decide to sell out their 49% share, with shares now valued at ~£2.10, and that share of NATS valued at around ~£1.2bn? .... would the Airline Group then be able to just walk away with a cash profit of 90p per share (plus the £45 million 'one-off' bonus they received this year) ? I make that about £350m profit.....
paid for by screwing your pension fund and screwing your pay and conditions ... ?
.. or is it naive to expect that any 'profit' is paid back into NATS to reduce its debt burden ? Are we not after all a not-for-profit organisation ?
3 -New owners come in and buy it .... can they just borrow the purchase capital and dump the debt on NATS again ?
Sadly I have no doubt that some scribbly beancounter is sharpening his pencil as we speak, looking at the bonuses, fees, creative accounting and kudos of dealing with Air Traffic Control, while the workers just get screwed over again .......
Happy to be corrected on my simple grasp of short-termist New Labour Britain.
1 - Government 'sells' 49% to the Airline Group, who put in ~£60m of their own money and then borrow ~£650m, saddling that debt onto NATS. (2005, shares were valued around £1.20 I recall?)
2 - If the Airline Group then decide to sell out their 49% share, with shares now valued at ~£2.10, and that share of NATS valued at around ~£1.2bn? .... would the Airline Group then be able to just walk away with a cash profit of 90p per share (plus the £45 million 'one-off' bonus they received this year) ? I make that about £350m profit.....
paid for by screwing your pension fund and screwing your pay and conditions ... ?
.. or is it naive to expect that any 'profit' is paid back into NATS to reduce its debt burden ? Are we not after all a not-for-profit organisation ?3 -New owners come in and buy it .... can they just borrow the purchase capital and dump the debt on NATS again ?
Sadly I have no doubt that some scribbly beancounter is sharpening his pencil as we speak, looking at the bonuses, fees, creative accounting and kudos of dealing with Air Traffic Control, while the workers just get screwed over again .......
Happy to be corrected on my simple grasp of short-termist New Labour Britain.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Southern England
Posts: 485
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1 - Government 'sells' 49% to the Airline Group, who put in ~£60m of their own money and then borrow ~£650m, saddling that debt onto NATS. (2005, shares were valued around £1.20 I recall?)
2 - If the Airline Group then decide to sell out their 49% share, with shares now valued at ~£2.10, and that share of NATS valued at around ~£1.2bn? .... would the Airline Group then be able to just walk away with a cash profit of 90p per share (plus the £45 million 'one-off' bonus they received this year) ? I make that about £350m profit.....
3 -New owners come in and buy it .... can they just borrow the purchase capital and dump the debt on NATS again ?
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ben Doonigan
We are not a 'not for profit' organisation.
We are a 'not for financial gain' organisation.
There is a subtle difference (allegedly), however the whole way we have been burdened by debt and the fact the airlines are wanting out at the first possible moment (with the resultant profit), and the fact that our shareholders want a dividend (and gets it), reduced costs and continued investment stinks IMHO.
As Eglnyt has stated, NATS sell-off was not unique though - the Consrvatives started it, Labour carried on the pillage of public services. (despite the Labour slogan and promise 'Our Skies Are Not For Sale').
I assume that as the airlines have only paid circa £60M of their own money, it would be too much to hope that they would only make profit on the shares that £60M bought them at the time of PPP???
That would be the fair way to do it, with the rest of the profit going towards the debt NATS is servicing.
It's galling that during CP3 and all the bleating by the airlines about NATS being too expensive, our 'partners' in the Airline Group conveniently forget that a great deal of NATS debt is down to them...
We are not a 'not for profit' organisation.
We are a 'not for financial gain' organisation.
There is a subtle difference (allegedly), however the whole way we have been burdened by debt and the fact the airlines are wanting out at the first possible moment (with the resultant profit), and the fact that our shareholders want a dividend (and gets it), reduced costs and continued investment stinks IMHO.
As Eglnyt has stated, NATS sell-off was not unique though - the Consrvatives started it, Labour carried on the pillage of public services. (despite the Labour slogan and promise 'Our Skies Are Not For Sale').
I assume that as the airlines have only paid circa £60M of their own money, it would be too much to hope that they would only make profit on the shares that £60M bought them at the time of PPP???
That would be the fair way to do it, with the rest of the profit going towards the debt NATS is servicing.
It's galling that during CP3 and all the bleating by the airlines about NATS being too expensive, our 'partners' in the Airline Group conveniently forget that a great deal of NATS debt is down to them...
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Sunny Scotland
Posts: 206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i agree with 10w. What have these companies to be scared of? certainly not its employees, who have shown time and time again that they are willing to accept any load of horse manure.
The times of our union once being a strong united force have gone. It began with the banding issue which drove the initial, yet significant wedge, and has continued with the nerl/nsl split,Working together, aava agreement, soal agreement etc etc.. All of these may have had minor detrimental effects on our terms and conditions on their own, but they have suceeded in removing the power the union once had, a united front. All that we have shown is that we will accept anything put to us , as long as there is a potential short term financial gain .
The times of our union once being a strong united force have gone. It began with the banding issue which drove the initial, yet significant wedge, and has continued with the nerl/nsl split,Working together, aava agreement, soal agreement etc etc.. All of these may have had minor detrimental effects on our terms and conditions on their own, but they have suceeded in removing the power the union once had, a united front. All that we have shown is that we will accept anything put to us , as long as there is a potential short term financial gain .
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: 24/7 Hardcore Heaven
Posts: 525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is the time when we need to stick together....The last thing we want is a new owner to come and strip NATS of whats left of our terms and conditions...
We brought this on ourselves. Suck it up.
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Land of the sand people.
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ahlan sadiqi Mr. 777..... couldnt agree with you more.
The new face of NATS now ever apparant and it will be one way negotiations accepted by your week union who, over the last pension and pay negotioatons have shown that they are far too cosy with devil spawn management to actually make any difference.
Its the harsh reality, but it looks like its the way things are from now on.
Sad..... but a reality.
Private Sandwiches Mohammed.
The new face of NATS now ever apparant and it will be one way negotiations accepted by your week union who, over the last pension and pay negotioatons have shown that they are far too cosy with devil spawn management to actually make any difference.
Its the harsh reality, but it looks like its the way things are from now on.
Sad..... but a reality.
Private Sandwiches Mohammed.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 351
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There will be no 'sticking together'. ATCO's will never strike for the other ranks and that is the end of it. ATSA/Engineers and others will be sold down the river, and the next step will be compulsory redundancies and I expect that to happen before Christmas. Prove me wrong? 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greystation
Posts: 1,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Doesn't matter who owns the 49%, they are always going to try and change some terms and conditions, just as the airline group have all through their reign. Why would them selling to another company make things worse? Any buyer will come in with the current terms and conditions and only then can the TRY to change them, if they actually think there is a need. Can't see where the panic is.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: france
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The matter isn't to own something as it is to day, the matter is to quit definitely as it is to day and back with our own private ATCO's company just to be paid for our control services done to all airlines flying over EU... and to nobody else... 